Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 04:02:08 04/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 02, 2001 at 19:58:05, Uri Blass wrote: >On April 02, 2001 at 17:57:53, Laurence Chen wrote: > >>On April 02, 2001 at 12:17:44, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On April 02, 2001 at 09:32:59, Laurence Chen wrote: >>> >>>>On April 01, 2001 at 23:12:07, James T. Walker wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 01, 2001 at 22:13:01, Laurence Chen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Is it me or other users are also experiencing the same "bug"? I've just updated >>>>>>Gambit Tiger to the new version, and the first thing I've tested was the >>>>>>analysis mode, and to my disappointment it fails to analyze if the position is >>>>>>an endgame if there's 5 pieces or less. I have all the 5 men tablebases, and >>>>>>the analysis mode fails to suggest any move at all. I think the Beta testers >>>>>>failed to check for bugs and they were supposed to check for all bugs, no for >>>>>>chess engine strenght alone, this annoys me. Well I hope that Christopher can >>>>>>fix this minor bug. >>>>> >>>>>Hello Laurence, >>>>>Why do you want to "analyze" a 5 man endgame when the tablebases will give you >>>>>the best move? I guess you are right, it's a bug but I don't see it as major >>>>>since just telling it to move will give the "best move". Also if you turn off >>>>>the "Use endgame databases" option under the "Extra/options" menus it will >>>>>analyze the endgame for you. >>>>>Jim >>>>Hi Jim, >>>> >>>>It's not that I want to analyze a 5 men endgame, it surprised me that the >>>>analysis mode failed when I loaded any 3, 4, or 5 men endgame. Of course, I >>>>could use any of my Chessbase engines in order to analyze 5 men endgame. Put >>>>this way, what if I set up a position with 7 men endgame, and it gets to a point >>>>in which a trade of pieces is possible to reduce to a 5 men endgame, because >>>>Chess Patner only displays the principal PV, unlike Chessbase GUI which gives >>>>all other alternatives, I like to try different moves in the analyzis mode and >>>>see what PV score GT or CT would give. And if the endgame gets reduced to a 5 >>>>men endgame, I won't be able to see the evaluation because of this bug. That >>>>means that I would have to use a Chessbase engine to analyze the position, which >>>>means closing CT or GT and open another program. Then what would be point of >>>>using GT or CT to analyze endgame positions if I need to open another chess >>>>program to do a follow up. Grrr.... >>>>Regards, >>>>Laurence >>> >>>Hello Laurence, >>>I still do not understand your problem. As I said above if you want to analyze >>>the position you can turn off the Tablebases then Tiger will analyze per normal. >>> If you are in the 5 man tablebases then what analysis is needed? The tablebase >>>gives you the answer to any move you input. So you can analyze with tablebases >>>on untill you get to 5 men. At that point you can get the "definitive" answer >>>to any move from the tablebases or you can turn off the tablebases and let Tiger >>>analyze without tablebase info. What could you miss with this procedure? With >>>tablebases on you get the "perfect" solution and with them off you get Tiger's >>>opinion (not necessarily perfect). >>>Jim >>Hi Jim, >>You and I are blessed to the fact that we can afford to buy new chess engines >>updates when they come out. What if you did not have any chess engine(s) which >>use(s) the tablebases? Because you have other chess engines which can access >>the endgame tablebases, you feel that this is not necessary. I wonder if you >>would feel differently if this was the only chess engine which you could have. I >>bet you would want to see the truth in 5 men endgames. >>Let's say that this was your only chess engine you could buy, and you wanted to >>study Rooks Endings (Rook+Pawn+King vs. Rook+King), and you wanted to know the >>proper technique of playing these type of positions, and if the chess engine >>cannot display the moves how would you know what the proper technique. > >It is more convenient to look at the analysis mode but you can still learn >without other programs from asking tiger to play. > > Not >>everyone can afford to buy many chess engines, and some of us like to use chess >>engines to learn technique in chess. > >A small minority use engines to learn playing tablebases positions. >Even if you use engines as a training tool there are more important things than >tablebase. > >I think that tablebases are not relevant in 99% of the human-human games. If you don't mind i raise that to 99.9% and that includes using them in the search before you get to EGTBs. I had one KQP KQ back in 1995 or whatever with me on the Q side, opponent had a-pawn. It appears i drew it very efficiently, but that at the moment that the endgame started the EGTB says it was a win for my opponent. However i see EGTB relevance for blitz very clearly, whereas for computer chess the relevance of egtbs is far more important as in 1% of the games. I see so many endgames where it helps at *any* level! >Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.